Can Schools Build Karakter

---

 


The Education Ministry will introduce “Pendidikan Karakter” (Character Education”) for the 2027 school curriculum, to create students who are “noble and responsible”.
Is this a knee-jerk reaction by a politician to the recent high-profile incidents in our schools?
For example, the multiple cases of bullying (including Zara Qairina Mahathir in a Sabah religious school), the shocking gang rape case allegedly by several students in Malacca and the fatal stabbing in a school at Bandar Utama, Petaling Jaya.
We hope that this latest programme has been well planned over several months. We don’t want this to be just about “melepaskan batuk di tangga” (letting off a cough at the stairs of a kampung house) ie “doing something in a slipshod manner just to be heard or seen to do something”.
Or, as a sarcastic Cantonese person will say, “sikk bao mou yeh jou (eat full nothing to do)”.
But circumstantial evidence suggests otherwise. On Oct 13, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim criticised schools for prioritising academic performance over the cultivation of moral and ethical values.
Anwar said that the Malacca school rape case showed that the education system had not cultivated students who truly understand empathy, responsibility, and humanity.
Three days later, on Oct 16, Education Minister Fadhlina Sidek announced the birth of Pendidikan Karakter! Was it her rapid reaction to the prime minister’s chastisement? Or a mere coincidence?
In a Facebook post, Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad, the former natural resources and environmental sustainability minister, said, “Please, enough of slogans.”
He slammed Fadhlina’s rushed announcement of new plans to address five key school problems as only addressing the symptoms, while failing to understand the root causes.
The five key areas are mental health, reproductive/social education/sexual violence, child protection, teacher care, and student voices.
Nik Nazmi added that a recent warning by education director-general Azam Ahmad for schools not to cover up bullying and sexual misconduct is a sign that the system has been discouraging those speaking up without fear.
Theory vs Real Life
In theory, the objectives of Pendidikan Karakter are laudable. To develop students who are kind, resilient, and grounded in strong moral values. To go beyond mere academics to also shape good character and emotional intelligence among the young.
Nobody can be against such lofty objectives. But something doesn’t seem right.
Take the name for starters. Why choose the word “karakter” when there is a perfectly good Malay word - “akhlak”?
What’s coming next? Pendidikan Minda? (Education of the Mind)
Oh yes, we still have Pendidikan Moral for non-Muslims, while the Muslims have Islamic classes.
Both are supposed to build the mental and moral fortitude of our youth. But unfortunately, having yet another subject on this matter is an indirect admission that the two existing classes have failed.
As a non-Muslim, I will not comment on agama classes. But Moral Education has been criticised for many years for being about rote memorisation of “moral principles” and a rigid “skema jawapan” (answer scheme) for assessments, punishing students who think outside the box.
Wrong national examples
One sample question is: What are the three consequences if patriotism is no longer practised?
Hmmm, what could the answer be? Let me guess… will it cause some politicians to turn the flag from being a symbol of true national unity into a racial weapon? As we saw during the recent Merdeka season, when a firebrand fellow from Umno confronted an elderly Chinese hardware shop owner in Penang?
Since it’s not an exam subject, many don’t take Moral Education seriously anyway. Rather, it’s seen as “something to do” in the vein of that proverbial “cough at the staircase”. That itself is a powerful message - that morals are not really important.
Meanwhile, students can see that a world-famous corrupt leader can get big “discounts” on their fines and jail sentences. What is the real lesson? That life is about “cables”, rather than good “character”?
The more critical question is: can morals or character really be taught in a classroom? I don’t believe so.
Rather, these values are “caught, not taught” - youngsters learn and internalise what they observe in the examples of adults, peers and yes, national leaders. And sadly, what they see online, too.
Adversity builds character
I was brought up in a cosy upper-middle-class environment by my parents. Then they had financial and work problems, and I was sent off to live with my grandparents, who were of much more modest means.
From being driven around everywhere, suddenly I had to walk to take two buses to get to school. The first bus was from Sentul Dalam, Kuala Lumpur, to Chow Kit. And then, I had to change buses there to get to Jalan Ampang.
Later on, after moving to Seremban, I walked under the searing sun to attend afternoon school sessions.
It was a mild hardship compared to my previously pampered childhood. But I “woke up” and became much more focused and disciplined in school, allowing me to excel in my studies.
In other words, adversity built my “character”.
I shake my head when I see parents nowadays triple-parking outside schools to pick up their kids.
What are they teaching? That it’s fine to be selfish and create traffic jams just because their precious ones can’t walk 100 or 200m under the hot sun to a car parked properly further away?
I have a friend who has a son in his late 20s who is still addicted to computer games and refuses to get a proper job.
The boy had too much of a comfortable life, or in Cantonese “hou sikk, hou jee” (good food, good house), and was unable to weather the hardships of the real world.
Some suggestions
Anyway, here are some suggestions for practical exercises to build students’ character. 
1) All students must take turns to clean school classrooms, compounds and yes, toilets, as done in Japan.
Malaysia is infamous for littering and filthy public toilets. We must inculcate cleanliness and care for public property in our young by real training, not by preaching in classes. 
2) All students must join uniformed, outdoor, or sports groups to build resilience.
For example, Boy Scouts, Girl Guides, Red Crescent, army cadets, trekking clubs, and various sports. Waiting to do this at a National Service camp after Form 5 is too late. Other alternatives are public speaking, debating, singing and drama groups.
3) Schools should work with town or kampung authorities to get students involved in public projects, such as planting trees and local beautification.
This also teaches them not to depend on government handouts but to take the initiative to help themselves. There is a phrase for this - gotong royong.
4) My friend Farouk P suggested that students should learn to serve at orphanages, senior citizen homes, and animal shelters.
“Let them practise kindness across racial and religious boundaries,” he said.
5) All students should be taught that politicians’ incitement of racial fear, corruption, and hypocrisy is not good for social cohesion.
Heck, those leaders should themselves undergo Pendidikan Karakter!  - Mkini
ANDREW SIA is a veteran journalist who likes teh tarik khau kurang manis. You are welcome to give him ideas to brew at [email protected].
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.

---